Pseudo error rate of a PSK system with hardware imperfections, noise and cochannel interference

A Novel Pseudoerror Monitor

“…Since the estimate of the larger of the two PERs to be exploited in the extrapolation contains comparatively negligible error, without loss of generality, the smaller PER is assumed to be P r1 and it is used to form the cost function C, that is, C = MSE log P r1 = bias 2 log P r1 + var log P r1 , (12) where bias log P r1 = E log P r1 − log P r1 , var log P r1 = E log 2 P r1 − E 2 log P r1 . (13) The value of P r1 can be obtained from the error counting approach, which provides an unbiased estimate of the ER (or PER).…”

“…Being the most straightforward measure of the reliability of data transmission, not surprisingly, the error rate (ER) has been widely recognized as a crucial criterion in evaluating the performance of a digital communication system. Many ER estimation methods have been described in the literature, for example, the error counting solution [1], the parameter estimation solution [1,2,3,4,5], the probability density function (pdf) approximation-based solution [6,7,8], the pseudoerror monitoring solution [1,9,10,11,12,13,14,15], and so forth. Among them, the pseudoerror monitoring scheme has attracted special attention due to its distinctive blind estimation capability and consistent performance in various environments.…”

Density estimation communication systems

“…A common practice is to treat the logarithmic ER as a linear function of the quality of the received signal. The validity of this approximation has been discussed in, e.g., [45][46][47][48], and it has been pointed out that, in most cases, the linear approximation is sufficiently accurate for error monitoring [38]. As an example, in Fig.…”